If you’ve never heard of the broken window story, it goes something like this :
A kid breaks a window of a storefront in his small city. Because of this damage, the store owner is forced to pay a glassier to repair it. As a result, the glassier is given business, money, and uses it to buy stuff he needs. In short, a broken window caused business activity, from an outside observer, a disaster or damage is the root of economic trade, without the problem, there would be one less job or opportunity.
This is a “fallacy” because it implies that damages or problems are good to have, as absent them, the economy would have no movement. As such, it’s justified to create jobs or create problems in order to “stimulate the economy”.
But, it’s ONLY a fallacy from a standpoint of not creating problems. If you were one of the players, whether the shop owner or the glassier, these actions mean a lot first hand to you.
Such is the problem with modern thinking in context of capitalism. Both liberals and conservatives are stuck in the thinking of “creating jobs” as a euphemism for either spreading wealth, promoting equality, or keeping people busy.
Short of government intervention, jobs are never created unless problems are created. Jobs cannot be artificially created unless the goal was to create jobs. Jobs are only available when there is a problem to solve, at best, the government may incentivize job creation by subsidizing wages or lowering barriers of employment. But nobody would create problems just to make excuses to hire people.
Who wants jobs? Workers and the poor and politicians of either side too modest to admit they want people to have MONEY.
Who hates jobs? Employers, property owners, capitalists.